A/HRC/37/55/Add.1 rights, including cultural rights, and should be addressed as such, in accordance with international standards and as a matter of urgency. V. Right to access and enjoy cultural heritage in Serbia and in Kosovo A. General issues 59. During the mission, the Special Rapporteur paid particular attention to the right to access and enjoy cultural heritage. A human rights approach to cultural heritage focuses on relationships between people and heritage, as well as on prevention of its destruction, education about the importance of the heritage of all and support for cultural heritage defenders. 60. Cultural heritage is to be understood as encompassing the resources enabling the cultural identification and development processes of individuals and groups, which they, implicitly or explicitly, wish to transmit to future generations. 14 It must be understood in a holistic way, including the perspectives, contributions and practices of all persons and groups. In Serbia and Kosovo, as important as they are, cultural heritage is not composed only of monasteries and mosques; it also includes artistic, historic and other cultural sites and practices in all their diversity. There should be no monolithic view of what constitutes or can constitute cultural heritage, and cultural heritage should never be used to construct discourses or policies aimed at the exclusion of others. Cultural heritage is, as one local expert underscored, “multilayered”. 61. All persons, whether members of ethnic or religious minorities, secular people, women, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, persons with disabilities or people of mixed identities, have the right to make significant contributions to how cultural heritage is understood, developed and integrated in cultural practices. 62. With regard to the tensions surrounding cultural heritage arising between Serbia and Kosovo in general, the Special Rapporteur wishes to make the following points. Perhaps unsurprisingly, narratives and perspectives about heritage were quite dissimilar depending on where they were expressed and by whom. The Special Rapporteur is concerned about the human rights impact of the perception gap regarding the meaning and importance of different aspects of cultural heritage. 63. She deeply regrets discourses disputing the importance of the cultural heritage of the Serbian Orthodox Church in Kosovo, or intentionally omitting mention of the specific relationship of the Serbian Orthodox Church with certain sites. Conversely, she greatly regretted encountering discourses minimizing the importance or even the existence of the cultural heritage of Kosovo Albanians. Both discourses are damaging to human rights and offensive, and must evolve in accordance with cultural rights standards. 64. Fortunately, some people in civil society from diverse backgrounds are eager to combat such perspectives. The Special Rapporteur appreciated those who echo such universalist views as “culture can never be divided”. This mirrors the historical practice of sometimes shared protection and repair of heritage sites in the region, which reflected coexistence. One positive current example was the organization of joint events by a civil society group in Mitrovica/Mitrovicë, with people of mixed backgrounds to visit each other’s sites of cultural significance. Such activities were curtailed due to lack of funding and need all possible support, from Serbia, from Kosovo, and from the international community. 65. While particular aspects of heritage have special resonance for and connections to specific groups, it is critical to enhance the notion of heritage as a shared common good important for all. The Special Rapporteur was glad to hear some official rhetoric in this 14 See A/HRC/17/38, paras. 4−5; and A/71/317, para. 6. 11